The man behind the Superstar

A few thoughts on Rajinikanth’s Deepavali-day interview on Zee Tamil, an “event” that possibly rivals 2.0 because the Superstar so rarely meets the media.

As he walks in, he looks like a benevolent family elder, bald and smiling and with kind eyes. He looks like he should be squeezing that slender frame into an easy chair, and disappearing behind The Hindu. Instead, he’s the star of stars, a super star, the Superstar, whose aura shows no signs of dimming. Amazing. Something tells me we’ll never see the likes of him again. Big stars, yes. Perhaps even bigger stars. But like him, no!

The host, Archana Chandhoke, begins by saying she wants to look at him like a fan. “Rendu kangal pathaathu,” she squeals. Two eyes aren’t enough. I am reminded of Papanasam Sivan’s composition that says he needs billions of eyes to gaze at the Lord. I don’t blame Archana. This rare interview by Rajinikanth is like a divine visitation.

The first question is surprisingly businesslike, about 2.0, the film he (He?) is out to promote. Apart from the characters, he says, there’s nothing similar between Enthiran/Robot and 2.0. There’s an “excellent message,” apparently. Because that’s why we go to Shankar movies, right?

At first, the film was planned without songs. Then, one title song was deemed necessary. Then, one “background song”. AR Rahman, then, said an album needs at least four songs. But the segue to Rajinikanth’s favourite song is more interesting. It’s Ponaal pogattum poda, from Paalum Pazhamum. I’m not surprised, given the star’s well-publicised spiritual side. It does make sense that he’s partial to this genre that was once called thathuva paadal (philosophical song). But this is the part I find most fascinating. He (being a Maharashtrian from Karnataka) had to find out the meaning of the song from a Tamil friend. How odd is that? I mean, he must have been drawn to the song only through the visuals and the music, then. Suddenly, an anecdote takes the form of a legend.

Was waiting for this superb write-up to go up here. The man’s in quite a deep soul-searching phase I feel. Between some 27 ‘’this thing’’ and 13 ‘’hatsoff’ utterances, 19 tongue-slips, some fluff about 2.0 and an (understandably) overenthusiastic anchor, this interview was superstar unwinding himself from all the latest stress of politics. Fascinating to hear about his dreams about cut-outs and fandom, how he was star-struck sitting next to Kamal in a car, his words about dreams losing their value once they’ve been realized, the faux-simplicity projected by stars and media, the maayai of fame, and the most touching of all, his fond recollections of fatafat Jayalakshmi, out of nowhere. This man deserves a graceful exit from cinema, before he’s put under the pump for his shaky politics.

Maybe you should try to interview him BR. I know that it is probably impossible but no harm trying. And you could probably tell him that the interview will be only about his cinema career and not anything about his fledgling political career.

One the rarest interviews where my eyes welled up more than once. Only this man can do this everytime he appears on screen. What a write-up to match it.. Super BR saar! Thank you.

Archana was just the perfect person to do this interview. When he says, “am I such a special person to be bestowed with such luck”, she jibes back and forth a couple of “oh”s in a mocking way and he gives a majestic laugh at the end of it. An instance of amazing “chemistry” between the interviewer and interviewee.

The segment where she says are you such a happy person who spreads positivity around, he replies saying that is the power of truth. That struck with me till the end.

love it that he still says san-tho-sham, for happiness – and not san-dho-sham, like Tamil speakers generally do

Yep, me too

I was very moved watching the interview, especially how he trivialized his simplicity. I cringe Everytime people like Vijay or ajith are mentioned as his successors. Politics is no place for a man like him. Hope he stays away. You are right, we’ll never see the likes of him again

Must say I’m a little saddened by how old he looks. I can buy him as my thaatha – he does the same “swallowing needlessly cos I’ve lost all my teeth” thing.

I haven’t watched the whole thing but I wanted to comment on this: In the West, when someone obviously popular and of some stature is interviewed, the interviewer tries or puts on a pretense of being objective and not overtly sycophantic. Puff piece is considered a pejorative. If I were a foreigner who somehow understands Tamil, I would think the hallmark of Tamil culture is sycophancy.

My goodness, how much each anchor tries to bend over backwards while simultaneously licking the shoes of whomever they interview. How do both sides put up with it – why is it so normalised that there is no other way? What does it say about society that any other way is unacceptable. How fucking stupid are we, really?

The Twitter reactions to this article is extremely funny. It looks like people go on Twitter just to fight and ridicule . A simple comment on manikandan’s aborted project leads you to be labeled as a Kamal Mani fan out to ridicule Rajni. Things that get people riled up these days, hmmm

I don’t think this article was anything but an emotional tribute to Rajini the superstar. But I do find Kamal references in a Rajini movie quite irritating. Especially the stretch in Sivaji where Rajini mimics mgr/Sivaji/Kamal, I feel is insulting to a Rajini fan. I am eagerly waiting for the fanboy made movie from Karthik Subburaj. People like Shankar/Ranjith seems to prefer Rajini’s market value/mass appeal but not Rajini himself.

MANK: And the funniest thing is that people from my generation have actually grown up with Rajini, enjoying his every transformation (actor to star to superstar to what he is today). There’s much more of an emotional connect — simply by virtue of him being around, like, say, Ilayaraja — than for someone who just tuned in circa Baasha 😀 When we were growing up, the only “thalaivar” was MGR 😀

People from my generation feel “connected” to Rajini and Kamal and Ilayaraja the way 90s kids feel connected to Vijay and Ajith and Rahman. The nostalgia factor that kicks in when something like Nallavanukku Nallavan plays on TV is something else. This “emotion” transcends the fact of liking or disliking a particular phase or a particular film.

Now I’m a 90s kid and want to have nothing to do with Vijay or Ajith. I have no clue where this “grew up with Vijay/Ajith” comes from. When I grew up I never heard about them, they were just some actors who delivered about 5 flops for every hit film. The only films which consistently generated hysteria were Rajni films and to some extent Kamal films. This whole Vijay-Ajith rivalry and their stardom is purely an industry concoction IMHO, and not organic. I’ve heard the women in the house talk about how Vijay has maintained his physique so well (I agree) and that’s that.

I’ve been affected by Rajni/Kamal hysteria. This was before I discovered his acting prowess and watched films like Mullum Malarum, so I was definitely in awe of Superstar Rajni. His films have always entertained and he does NOT take the audience for granted. Even a film like Baba is quite watchable IMHO and way better than the dreck that Vijay/Ajith serve nowadays, even considering that it is basically propaganda.

Outside of film, I think of Rajni as a very good representative of my parents’ generation. A well mannered conservative simple guy. When he said in the Kochadaiyan audio launch that he wanted his daughter to have children before working in films, I thought this was something that quite a few people from my family might say. Even the way he speaks English (contrast that with the way Kamal speaks) is that typical economical English that a lot of Indians speak. He’s just very relatable to a whole bunch of people and I can see where “love him cause of his simplicity” comes from. And I appreciate the fact that he retooled after the failure of Lingaa. I’m not a big fan of Kabali/Kaala but props to Rajni for such a bold move. I have full faith in Karthik Subburaj and am cautiously optimistic about 2.0.

Thalaivar is an emotion. I don’t think people can easily understand that unless they’ve traversed the journey alongside him. Your write up was such a poignant reminder of how we want more snippets, more excerpts about this journey… his camaraderie with Kamal, friendship with fellow stars and the 89s reunion… and ofcourse his collaboration with P.ranjith. BR for the sake of Tamil cinema you should do an interview with this legend. Ofcourse it might the hard to not play the unabashed fan girl but you will bring a certain intelligence to the conversation that is sorely overlooked.

BR, like you mentioned, I grew up with Rajini, Kamal, Ilayaraja, Radhika. Hard to put it but it is like they are part of the family. It is fun when I hear people say “namma rajini” or “namma radhika” in conversation. A special connection?ni guess 1978, Rajini had 21 films that year. While I still like his style, post Thalapathy and Baasha, those movies are not Rajini movies at all. I would give my money to watch Rajini with that rawness from Bairavi, Kaali, Thappu Thaalangal, Avargal, Kazhugu, or Mullum Malarum. Johnny and Ilamai Oonjaladugirathu movies were ahead of their times. And his timing sense for humor from Thillu mullu and Thambikku entha ooru.

I wish he doesn’t get in to politics. I do wish like you he acts in character roles with good directors like Manikandan. Oh, well, will keep wishing.

watched the full interview and I must say I agree with anon. Archana was annoyingly displaying her sycophancy. Especially when the man himself is trying to be modest.

He was very honest in answers – and more importantly he appears to be someone who is aware of his popularity, .that he has benefited from it, and that he has also been extremely lucky to be where he is today. For such a candidate, you needed someone much better than a squealing, hyper-excited anchor. I come back to my request above – maybe you could try your hand at it. Maybe, a “Conversations with Rajini” kind of web series?

This was just so amazingly written BR. Something tells me we won’t read the likes of you either! In fact, it was so good I can almost forgive you for being a Kamal fan. (No need for a PIL just a poor joke!)

The Fatafat Jayalakshmi mention made me misty eyed. Not really familiar with her work but I loved her in Mullum Malarum and the ‘nitham nitham nellu soru’ track is a great favorite of mine. How about an article on Shoba and her?

@BR: I am not going to blame Twitter this time. I was also mildly disappointed that you suddenly started wondering if capital He must be used for Rajini, hitherto used only for Kamal. What is this new habit of gifting it to anyone and everyone? *exit *

“What’s wrong with MJ?!” – That he was not a musicals guy, ‘just’ the biggest pop star that the planet has ever produced. I think if somebody’s talking genres, they should try to get it right. Er, unless it’s extreme metal/blues subgenres or something like that.

“Now I’m a 90s kid and want to have nothing to do with Vijay or Ajith. ” – Seconded. I am not sure about whether or not they are media made phenomena only. Maybe, but what I can say is for both the biggest and most ‘mass’ hits came only in the noughties. In the nineties, they cashed in on their youth to play chocolate loverboy. Ajith experimented a little with stuff like Vaali but Vijay was loverboy until IIRC some of these films began to bomb. Somebody said in Tamil cinema, you have to do action well to be a mass star and I agree (this is not necessarily the case with SRK/Aamir in Hindi nor arguably Rajesh Khanna either). In the 90s, the action heroes were still Kamal and Rajni mainly with Captain and Arjun bringing up the second tier. Sathyaraj enjoyed some hits intermittently. Meanwhile, Ilayam, Thala, Abbas, Vineet, Prabhudeva, Prashant crowded out the romantic comedy/tragedy/manaangati genre.

“they would be right, at least about the Tamil film industry culture” – Not only Tamil film industry but our general culture. Have a look at this uber sycophantic piece about Sachin. The funniest part is the writer moved to UK as a teen and yet posits that his experience is a proxy for millions of Indians who needed an Indian identity in the 90s. Er, I didn’t need it because I lived/live in India.

Of course, on the other hand, if you’re Harsha Bhogle and while always being polite to a fault, don’t hesitate to make a point and don’t see anything wrong in talking about cricketers from other countries, you’ll get it from our petulant crybaby of a skip. So guess TV journalists in particular have to toe the line; the stakes are too high to say something that might offend these thin skinned demigods.

Truly, the unassuming attitude is what makes Rajini! I remember an interview by one of the Sun channels just before Enthiran was released. He spoke about his life in general and in between switched to his bus conductor days for a brief moment. The way he spoke about it was plain and matter-of-fact as it could get. The man did not hit a high or low note when switching nor bat an eyelid. It is hard to capture that feeling in words but the nonchalance (for the lack of a better word) was not put on. Here is a man at peace with whatever he had been through and simply accepting.

(As I type this, I also remember the following in the same interview)
When asked about the movie, his long career, and the toll it takes on him, he simply said something like “every day i consider myself fortunate to be called for projects like these and my job is to do justice to the role the director has envisioned.. “. Many would have waxed about this but he was actually telling people to go seize the moment and be thankful for the opportunity.

Many may have said similar words but what he said felt pure. Until then, I never really idolized Rajini but after that interview, I was most certainly in awe of the person.

@Madan, I know they have delivered hits, have a fanbase etc. But their films were never events the way Rajni’s films were (maybe because Rajni films released about once in 3 years). I just don’t understand how and when the transition happened. With Rajni, I think Baasha is when he clearly became a yuge mass star, and I can accept that because Baasha is a very well made mass film.

Even if a mass star can get away with producing mediocre films, I think the film that makes him a star has to have broader appeal, and should generally be considered well made. Eg. Dhool and Saamy established Vikram as a mass star, so he could get away with some crappy films for a while but only for a while. The audience started punishing Vikram for his missteps and some of his experiments like Raavanan backfired. Now Vikram is considered a lesser star than Sivakarthikeyan. I don’t think Surya has made a successful mass masala but I don’t think he is considered a mass star, he doesn’t have a rabid fanbase for one.

I don’t think the Thala-Thalapathy euphoria was even there before 2010-11. It may have existed but the general audience didn’t know or care. Suddenly after 2011, Vijay was a huge star, Ajith was a huge star, their films get bumper openings. How did this happen? Their rise to superstardom is not organic which is why I feel the industry must have had a concerted campaign to push these two names. It happens all the time in sports, where a player or a group of players become the face of the team or sometimes even the sport. Like Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Tom Brady. Of course, they are great athletes and outliers among outliers, but there is an incredible marketing machine built around these athletes that ensures that the public never forgets their names.

@therag: Rajni was already a huge star even before Badshah/Annamalai. I think what changed with these films is they revolved around a narrative of Rajni beating impossible odds as (usually) a working class man. The parallels here between Rajni’s own life story and the character on screen evoked a new level of frenzy, taking him from mass to mass hysteria. The films that didn’t strictly follow this template like Veera or Arunachalam weren’t such outright successes as Badshah/Annamalai/Muthu/Padayappa which seemed to establish this as the new template around which every Rajni film would now have to be based. And which marked the point where I got off. Also why I liked Endhiran because it brought back shades of the absent minded professor of Dharmathin Thalaivan and the villain of Mundru Mudichu/Gayathri, i.e the Rajni who used to act whilst effortlessly sweeping the gallery off their feet.

It’s possible of course that the Thala-Thalapathy euphoria is entirely manufactured because even now, their run rate is not as amazing as Rajni’s (then again, as you said, they make too many films and don’t let the anticipation build up). Could also be they know where they really stand and can’t stay away from the market for so long lest somebody else occupies their space.

I really want to believe that Vijay and ajith’s stardom are manufactured. Despite being non actors (which isn’t a problem in itself), they have zero charisma which makes me wonder how they got where they are now. Vijay’s style is entire stale and borrowed. His dialogue delivery is monotonous, his romantic stares are creepy. His dancing is terrific and can do comedy when he has a good supporting cast, but is incapable of the sort of heavy lifting say an Soorya did in Singam or Vikram did in gemini. Heck, I can’t even think he’ll be able to pull off sirithai like Karthi did.

Ajith’s case is even more puzzling. He is neither a good actor, dancer or a style icon. I think there was no one to fill the void that kamal and Rajni, and later the likes of Arjun and Vijaykanth left for action films. So these two despite their mediocrity were lapped by Tamil pattithotti.

If by manufactured people mean loads of PR, fan club galvanizing etc, then it is true. If by manufactured you mean media made/fake, then that’s simply not true. Ask anyone in the business of cinema, not those who just love cinema (even the distinction can be problematic with Vijay/Ajith films included). Kamal lost the ability to open a film a long time ago. Rajini has to depend on Kabali like aggressive promotion strategy and still cannot hold it. Vijay and Ajith are the only two stars who can command that business without much effort. It’s really them saying deal with it. So you accept it or not and disagree with the exact time when these changes happened, Vijay and Ajith are a force to reckon with and probably only ones at the moment with that clout.

As another 90s’ kid, I can reaffirm what people above said. Vijay & Ajith were nowhere in the scene at all when we grew up. Even Kamal, Rajni’s contemporary, started doing crazy Mohan comedies and so we didn’t identify him as a superstar of the masses. 90s was just Rajni out there all by himself, enjoying some other-wordly craze, with Muthu, Annamalai, Basha and later Padayappa shooting him up to the pinnacle of stardom. Even as late as ca.2007, with Vijay and Ajith having started to taste their mass success with Pokkiri and Billa, a Sivaji would come and show who’s the boss in terms of youth appeal. Even in my college time, disclosing oneself as a Vijay fan (Villu, Vettaikaran, Sura phase) would make him the butt of jokes. I believe the connect Vijay has now was formed in the post-Thuppaki resurgence phase, as the noughties’ kids are hitting their teens and adolescence now. Ajith OTOH has always been a mystery, as Thupparivaalan mentioned. Some say it’s his movies like Dheena, Attagasam, Billa, Mankatha etc., some say it’s his looks, while others claim his off-screen persona to be that X factor. Even his fans don’t seem to know.

When he is not trying to be a politician, Rajini is probably the most self aware star in the country. I was annoyed a bit with 2.0 promotional questions but I guess a rare interview of the man, made it just a minor issue.

@Madan: Thanks for mentioning Gayathri. This came before Sivappu Rojakkal, based on story by Sujata. Rajini, relished the anti-hero role.

In Kollywood, may be in other *woods also, there seem to be an unwritten rule that once you become a hero, you are always a hero and don’t have to act. Stars have to be portrayed as “do good”ers, larger than life guys. Fandom/industry seems to be toeing that line. No one thinks about that something called “acting” and “cinema”. At the end, we get time pass entertainment, but no good cinema with great shades of characters or acting. That is a big plus with Hollywood. Will any Kollywood big name act in Jack Nicholson role in “The Departed”? Leonardo in Wolf of Wall Street? Tom Cruise stopped doing it, but he did act as a MCP in Magnolia. Brad Pitt hilarious Gym trainer in Burn after reading. None of our guys will be up for it. Only hope I have is Vijay Sethupathy and possibly Madhavan.

Why is that? I see that as a curse. Guess we can’t differentiate acting as a profession/art from the actor as a person. Curse and disease I guess. We all lose out. For all the hoopla around Rajini, in last 25 years, name one movie from him that can be considered cinema? Only Enthiran makes it. Rest are forgettable and I had to watch it since they show up in water cooler and lunch time conversation – you haven’t seen it yet?

For someone who grew up in Karnataka and for whom the Rajini phenomenon was only remotely experienced, the sycophancy of the anchor – the practiced devotion, the incessant praise, the hammy expressions – grated. Palabhishekhams of cut-outs are easier to rationalise than this meaningless charade of compliments. This is an encomium masquerading as an interview. However, the YouTube comments on the videos are full of praise for the anchor. Rarely have I felt more alienated from Tamil culture.

“In Kollywood, may be in other *woods also, there seem to be an unwritten rule that once you become a hero, you are always a hero and don’t have to act. Stars have to be portrayed as “do good”ers, larger than life guys. ”

I think as of now, this is more extreme in Tamil as opposed to at least Bollywood. While some of this kind of larger than life-isation still happens w.r.t Salman, it’s also true that a large segment of the audience does not watch Salman films anyway. That is, the excessive idolisation comes at a price. So while Tiger Zinda Hai did good business, Race 3 and Tubelight not so much. The other Khans are not so hung up on image; if anything, SRK’s most popular phase was his anti hero one. It didn’t ‘disqualify’ him when he acted in romcoms along side (like Kabhi Haan Kabhi Na). Of current actors, Ranbir Kapoor has done very grey roles like in Rajneeti and Ranveer played an outright villain in Padmavat. And even at the height of Big B mania, I don’t think there was any attempt to conflate his personal image with the roles he played (the way say Rajni’s roles since Annamalai are tailored to evoke his own against-the-odds struggle). Before Padmavat, I would have said it is impossible to imagine a top Bollywood star playing a thorough fiend like Leo in Wolf of Wall Street but now I would say yes.

Agreed that few if any Rajni films of the last two decades have been interesting, barring Endhiran. Diehards will say that is never the point of a Rajni film and fair enough but I wish it was.

“The other Khans are not so hung up on image; if anything, SRK’s most popular phase was his anti hero one. ”

But that was his starting phase. Once DDLJ came out, SRK never went back to negative roles. Just like Shatrughan Sinha and Vinod Khanna who too started with negative roles for some time. For that matter even Rajni was popular in negative roles (few films he did).

Real test will be when someone switches between positive and negative roles.

BTW watching Darr in Delhi, when SRK knives Sunny Deol during the climax of Darr, there were loud cheers in the hall. It was so surreal. To see crowd rooting for the villain was a unique experience.

” Once DDLJ came out, SRK never went back to negative roles.” – Hmm I would say it is different from Rajni because in the Darr years, SRK was alternating his villainous/anti-hero turns with rom com ones like in Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman or KHKN. Yes, it has mystified me that he didn’t just shun anti hero roles but overall became too soft image wise after DDLJ. I think turning into a pure romantic hero helped him in the short run but is the reason why he is the least successful now of the three Khans.

” To see crowd rooting for the villain was a unique experience.” – Ha ha, no wonder Sunny was pissed off. That also happened with Padmavat by the way, a result of Shahid either having to or himself choosing to underplay too much and Ranveer getting all the macho masala dialogues.

Ajith and Vijay got their timing right – that is my simple explanation. After Baasha and Indian, Rajni and Kamal went on to do lightweight movies like Arunachalam, Avvai Shanmugi, Kadhala Kadhala, Muthu for about 3-4 years. Then we had the ageing Satyaraj, Prabu, Captain, Karthik, Sarath, Arjun on one side and the so-so Prasanth, Arun Vijay, Abbas, Vinith, Prabhudeva on the other.

A portal to stardom was opened in this brief period of lull (96-99), when Ajith and Vijay made an impact with Kadhal Koattai, Vaali, Poove Unakaga, Kadhaluku Mariyadhai, Thullatha manamum etc. It may be hard to believe now, but Vijay and Ajith were the creamy layer among the youth stars of the 90s – yeah the situation was that sumaar.

Then Rajni came back to his A-game with Padayappa and even Kamal created a stir with his Hey Ram. And Ajit Vijay were content to paddle along with hits and misses. Then there was again a lull after the Aalavandhan/Baba debacle & the window of opportunity to make an impact in the mas(s)ala area presented itself. And both Ajith and Vijay peaked then with Ghilli & Villain. It took them just these 2 movies at the right time to lay the foundation for their current mass-image and fan following. Ditto for Suriya-Kaaka Kaaka and Vikram-Dhool/Gemini.

Stars like Dhanush and Simbu, who are quite good at commercial cinema couldnt rise to the level of Vijay Ajith (or even Surya for that matter) because they peaked at the wrong time. i.e they gave their best hits when the Sivaji/Enthiran tsunami along with Dasavatharam (the movie which everyone dislikes & disses, but had a solid run in the B.O) came.

So whenever these 2 stalwarts were in prime form, the other actors were always outshined no matter how good their output was. Just to prove further, VJS and Sivakarthikeyan came into prominence when Kamal went out of the race and Rajni kept dishing out Lingaas and Kochadayans.

True that! It was with Thirumalai he became an action hero. I nearly became a fan after watching him in the film. 🙂 He was pretty much at ease with the Madras Bashai – easily the best by a hero since Kamal. The film had some good songs too.

The skills Kamal has in his repertoire are extensive and well known. This is not entirely surprising for someone who is on top of his game. But even outside his passion and profession i.e Cinema, Kamal comes across as knowledgeable and widely read. His views on Socialism, Gandhi and Tamil literature are not layman views. At least he does not present himself as a layman.

The more one learns the less he knows. Knowledge of this stature should make one humble. But humbleness is not exactly what comes to mind when we talk about Kamal.

A creator is like a God. Gods can be arrogant. Kamal is a creator. The creator in Kamal probably dulls the humbleness that should have come from his knowledge. Do all creators exhibit this tendency? May be not. But there are at least two other creators who fall in this category. Ilaiyaraja and Jeyamohan. Two people, like Kamal, who are very proud about what they have created. Their pride always comes along with their achievements. People who can’t differentiate their pride and achievements hate them for who they are rather than what they have done.

Rajini is in contrast almost in every way next to Kamal. Rajini is hardly an intellectual. He doesn’t pop names of experts, randomly, when he speaks. He can hardly speak coherently, without going in tangents, for that matter. His language is not polished. Even in his own field Rajini doesn’t always come across as someone who knows things in depth. His attempts in singing and directing went in vain. This is the Super Star that nobody knows where the ‘Super’ comes from.

May be Rajini knows. Knows what he don’t know. That the ‘Super’ in his Star is only a mirage and can be seen only at a fans’ distance. The Star that appears in the screen is not the person behind it. The Star has no limitations but the person has. He comes across as someone who has accepts life, both for what it is and what it is not. His off screen appearance is in a way saying that this is not the person you see in the screen. The Star out there is immortal and invincible. I am not.

Rajini is not a creator. Even if he is one, I doubt he would have believed that himself. The spiritualist in him would have said “I only play my part – – the part the director wants, the part God wants”. May be this grounded offscreen persona adds some charisma to his onscreen appearance, at least for his fans. Like a deity in a temple that is a stone and a God simultaneously. God for the believers. Only a black stone for itself. But when the stone dresses up, its always a festival.

If Kamal is an atheist God, Rajini is the spiritual human. While one walks around with his immortal creations, the other lives with his fallibility.

I remember my cousin asking me in 2000/01, if I was ajith or vijay fan( he was barely 9 or 10 then) – i was startled too wondering when did rajni or kamal became ajith or vijay question. At the same time I had a classmate ( from madurai) who was a huge fan of vijay. There are quite a few instances like these.

All I am saying it wasnt something that happened in 2011. It was there even in early 2000.

Vijay had quite a few hits as the guy delivering a lecture in climax about one side love. Cashed that success into successful masala movies. Except for few years of low before thuppaki he has had a strong box office i think.

Ajith is even more of a mystery because he doesnt even have box office success at all. Pretty much whole of 2000-2010 – i think he was delivering dud after dud till billa.

are they worthy of superstardom – no, no, no. But it is definitely not media made.

**
I dont think a vaccum create stars, the khans are super stars with unparalleled success. ( hrithik may be). Only in the past 3-5 years we are seeing some possibles.

I didnt even understand rajni fandom till I came to US, so how vijay becomes a star – giving out the same expression movie after movie or ajith with no acting chop becomes one is all a puzzle.

IMO the decline phase as an actor and ascent as a star begins when an actor starts picking scripts based on calculations, instead of stories they genuinely like. Baasha or Annamalai were probably not written with calculations on how to make Rajinikanth a big star or how to rake in big money. But one movie like that, sets the precedent for future movies of the actor, where how the hero has to be introduced on camera has more thought put into than the story/screenplay itself.

Vijay and Ajith have given dozens of horrible movies throughout their mediocre oeuvre. The key difference is earlier they chose crappy movies like Shahjahan or Aval Varuvala because they liked the crappy stories for some reason. Then comes a movie or 2 that makes them a big star and now crappy scripts are tailor made for them and calculations are made how it will help them in real life.

What sets Kamal haasan apart from his contemporaries and the ones who came after is, he mostly didn’t let the star takeover the passion he had for cinema. He kept doing movies that he wanted to do, no matter box office result or if his contemporaries overtook him in stardom. And in doing so, he continuously contributed to improve the art he was associated with in all aspects.

“What sets Kamal haasan apart from his contemporaries and the ones who came after is, he mostly didn’t let the star takeover the passion he had for cinema.” – I think for Kamal, the ego of performer reigns supreme and to be fair, he has more or less acknowledged this in interviews. He has range and he WANTS to show it off in his roles. To tie it in with Easwar’s earlier comment too, he has not evolved quite to the point where he will only act as per the script’s requirements and sacrifice his ego. IMO that is very rare among talented actors who get popular and do lots of lead roles; they have a narcissistic trait at some level and want to hog the limelight. I honestly can’t think of an actor just now from Hindi or Tamil who has Kamal-like stardom and is secure enough to adopt understatement where that is all that’s required (Mamoothy comes to mind in Malayalam, AB at times but more in later years). In Hollywood, Russell Crowe is a good example of a big name actor who avoids Al Pacino-like showboating, though he is very much capable of delivering volcanic monologues with aplomb when he needs to. Al could have played the extroverted and curmudgeonly journalist of State of Play but whether he could have essayed John Nash or Jeffrey Wigand…I have my doubts. But back to Kamal, he doesn’t mind films flopping as long as they afford the space for him to showboat. But I don’t think he would want to step away from that (I don’t mean he wants to showboat through the entire role but wants there to be scope for it somewhere in the role). Perhaps his entry into politics is tacit acknowledgment that the public doesn’t find his showboating as captivating as it once did.

To also touch upon Easwar’s comment:

” People who can’t differentiate their pride and achievements hate them for who they are rather than what they have done.” – I think Indian audiences for some reason don’t understand the ego of performer. There is no point in demanding them (the performers) to keep it aside because for some (even many) that ego may be part of what drives their performances to captivating levels. In the West, it’s very normal for star actors or even singers to sound egoistic. And while that gets mentioned, yes, it is usually not accompanied by the recrimination that I have come across here and more so in TN. It is well known for instance that Lata is arrogant and manipulative but this aspect is not usually talked about so much compared to Raja and thalaiganam which as a combination will instantly deliver a thousand search results. There is a need in Tamil for a Raju Bharathan-like figure (without his English!) to humanise these stars without demonising them. Accept that they are not Gods how much ever you may wish they are but also don’t condemn them for merely being human.

“I remember my cousin asking me in 2000/01, if I was ajith or vijay fan( he was barely 9 or 10 then) ” – That’s interesting. My cousin was an Ajith fan in that time period and he would have been 10 too. But it was not (yet) a Vijay or Ajith question. And I think he placed Ajith in a basket along with Vijay and Vikram (couple of years later, say around Dhool). Rajni was the ultimate star.

@Madan, Raju Bharatan made up quite a bit of stuff, including his supposed ‘closeness’ to stars and directors and music directors, and what they ‘said’ to him and what he ‘said’ to them. Moreover, his unauthorised biography of Lata Mangeshkar was such a horrible vilification campaign that had India had better libel laws, Bharatan would have been sued for defamation.

Raju Bharatan use to romanticize a lot, be it cricket or HFM. Thinking back, he was overrated for the same reason, unless you happen to be the fan of the person he was overrating. His classic romanticism is his description of G R Vishwanatha’s 97 notout against WI at Chepauk (those days Chepauk has to be a terrific bouncy and pacy track). Granted a terrific knock against a marauding Andy Roberts, but he made it sound like it was an out of the world innings.

But I am forever indebted to him for being the source of two well known trivia which I use to remind and irritate both Rafi and Kishore fans :- That Rafi took 11 retakes for Tasveer Teri Dil mein and Kishore became an avatar of Mohd Ghazni by retaking 17 times for Guzar Jaye Din Ki Harpal (both by Salil C).

“, his unauthorised biography of Lata Mangeshkar was such a horrible vilification campaign that had India had better libel laws, Bharatan would have been sued for defamation.” – Haven’t read it. I think making up stuff is bad, of course, and yes, he would never be able to get away with it with effective libel laws. But the attitude of covering the more human, not necessarily unsavoury, traits of the artists is something I respect. That Talat felt a superiority complex towards Rafi which he would later regret. It sounds plausible and it is a very human emotion. Rather than pretending that everything was hunky dory when we know it wasn’t.

“he made some horror movies like Uyarndha Ullam, Naanum oru Thozhilali, et” – Yappa, Uyarndha Ullam! My God! What a mokkai movie it was! 😀 Yeah, between these tired clunkers and Vikram not setting the box office afire, he had virtually nothing on his plate until Nayagan changed the game completely.

@ Tambi Dude: It speaks volumes (!) about Bharatan that he considers himself more passionate about cricket than music. I could live with his music writing if only because nobody else seemed to be interested in it but his cricket writing was absolutely atrocious. The rant he wrote after the Kolkata incident (99) (where Shoaib inadvertently blocked Sachin from completing a run and led to Sachin getting run out) was flat out unreadable. Oh, and he was very very pro Sachin those days, don’t remember if he changed his stripes later.

@Shaviswa – Yes, I agree Kamal haasan dabbled with some horrible commercial movies during his late 20s, but look at what happened after Nayagan – Rajini clearly became a bigger star compared to Kamal haasan, but Kamal haasan instead of going after box office collections or chasing superstardom, he consistently made/starred in movies that would outlive him.

In doing so he made a huge contribution to Tamil cinema this past 20 years not just as an actor, but as director/screenwriter/producer. The fact that he did not stop doing that after flops like Guna, Hey Ram, Anbe sivam speaks volumes about his passion for the craft.

But like I said earlier, occasionally he did projects that were self indulgent, but off late it became too much to bear even for people who liked his sensibilities.

That said, he was a treasure house of trivia. One trivia I remember was about Rafi during his doldrum days in early 1970s where he was reportedly told by a MD that he forgot how to sing in front of a mike. He went to Naushad’s house and cried, before Naushad spoke some confidence boosting words.

BTW around 1974 my dad saw a poster of Mughamad (sic) Rafi night , written in tamil at (gasp) Dindigul station. Such was his desperation. He also sung some atrocious telugu songs in that time frame.

Madan, Bharatan, like Khalid Mohammed, had his pet favorites. Whoever was his favourite at the time got good press. If he had a falling out, then the venom came out, double quick. His biography of Lata Mangeshkar was written after he had a falling out with her, and the hatchet was out. The book was an amalgamation of rumour, supposition, and some vainglorious poseuring.

Bharatan likes feeling important, and he often made himself sound more important than he was – he once wrote about Salilda sending him a composition to ask his [Bharatan’s] opinion about it. I mean, really?!

And Talat may (or may not) have felt superior to Rafi (I refuse to take Bharatan’s word that he felt that way – Talat was, by all accounts, a gentleman) but fact remains that they were very good friends.

For instance, Manna Dey has confessed to feeling bad that he wasn’t given songs that were given to Rafi, even by his own uncle.

Talat, by all accounts of him – from peers, music directors, lyricists, people who knew him, etc., was a gentleman. I cannot believe – especially on Bharatan’s say so – that he thought himself superior to Rafi.

Mukesh was famously honest about his limited range as a singer.

Unlike the women singers of the time, the male cadre had a great deal of camaraderie and friendship amongst them.

And even with Lata, what is today termed as her ‘arrogance’ would have been celebrated if it was a male singer in her position. Because Lata asked for her due and that was not looked upon kindly. Whereas a Kishore, who also asked for his due, was considered ‘eccentric’ not arrogant.

“Yeah, between these tired clunkers and Vikram not setting the box office afire, he had virtually nothing on his plate until Nayagan changed the game completely.”

@Madan, I’m not so sure that is entirely accurate. I’d actually say that Kamal has always done mass movies mixed with class movies (for lack of a better word, apologies!) until the mid 90s, at least. During the same time frame of Uyarndha Ullam and Naanum oru Thozhilali (both are duds, and I won’t debate that), came Oru Kaidhiyin Diary, Kakki Sattai, Swathi Muthyam, Punnagai Mannan…all big hits. Similarly, after Nayagan, he continued to dabble with masala such as Soora Samhaaram, Vetri Vizha, Sathya, Aboorva Sahodarargal, Chanakyan, Singaravelan etc. The fact is both were doing so many films, that some were bound to be hits and some absolute clunkers. I still remember that when Nayagan released, the film that had the bigger collections was Manithan, a film that even Rajini would agree didn’t deserve to be more successful that Nayagan! 🙂 Two anecdotes come to mind…a fellow school mate, on seeing the first day show of Nayagan, came back and said…”Semaiyya nadichirikkan, aana padam oduma theriyala”! 🙂 The second one was a popular angle mentioned during the Kamal-Rajini “wars” after a few years….”Ungaalu kuttaiya nadichaaru, mottaiya nadichaaru, komanathula nadichaaru, aana collection yaarukku?”! 🙂

@Madan – My memories of late 90s/early 2000s satellite tv channels was that Vijay/Ajith were already anointed as the next Rajni/Kamal. Vijay as next Rajni was bearable but Ajith was supposed to be the next Kamal!. I remember this fairly well since I was a PrabhuDeva fan(amongst younger heroes) at that time and had never understood why he was never mentioned in these next SuperStar equations 😉

Does the Rajini/Kamal dichotomy even apply with Vijay and Ajith? Both of them are trying to be Rajini kind of mass heroes, and neither are trying to be like Kamal, unless you count the films in which Ajith did multiple roles. Unless you’re using Rajini/Kamal to simply mean “the top two stars.”

Ravi K:Unless you’re using Rajini/Kamal to simply mean “the top two stars.”

That’s what it is. Unlike the MGR=Rajini (in the mass sense) and Sivaji=Kamal (in the seeking different ‘actorly’ roles sense) equation, here both Ajith and Vijay are ‘mass’ stars.

I don’t think a Sivaji/Kamal can happen again. In the sense that even Rajini had to abandon his stab at “soft” films (like Kai Kodukkum Kai) and get behind the more hardcore mass-masala bandwagon. So for an actor TODAY (in the home-viewing era) to get the Sivaji/Kamal kind of stardom with “soft” films is out of the question. That audience just isn’t there in enough numbers to justify blockbuster theatrical sales. Even Kamal’s biggest hits (Vettaiyaadu, Dasavatharam) are more massy (in the broad sense). I don’t see a Salangai Oli or a Moondram Pirai becoming huge hits today.

@Tambi Dude: I am pro Sachin myself in the sense that duh he was one of the greatest etc. So when I call somebody pro Sachin I am putting him in the fanatic category. The ones who cannot possibly be reasoned with. Bharatan’s articles then were completely lacking in balance.

@Anu Warrier: Some context about the Talat quote. He is shown as himself recollecting the phase in the early 50s when he was a singing star and Rafi was up and coming and he mentions feeling then that Rafi’s Punjabi Urdu was no match for his Lucknowi diction(I agree with that!). He rather regrets thinking about Rafi this way and not appreciating his talent then. So it came across as honest self reflection.

Re Lata, I don’t really mind that she spoke up for more money which is her prerogative (though I don’t agree that singers can be paid royalty). Rather, I have found her very lacking in warmth when talking about other female singers (in interviews not conducted by Bharatan, I may add). Maybe it’s a combination of arrogance and insecurity because she probably never stopped seeing others as competition even into the 90s and I have found that to be a disappointing aspect about her. Again that’s just how she is and fair enough.

@Shankar Didn’t mean to say that Kamal pivoted out of commercial films after Nayagan. If at all he did, it may have happened in recent years and not intentionally. He was still doing Crazy Mohan comedies into the early noughties. But I just meant Nayagan happened at the right time for him. He wasn’t necessarily in danger of getting wiped out but the phase just before Nayagan had a bunch of underwhelming films that didn’t do justice to his abilities. I agree though that both had lots of flops in that decade and sometimes, like buses, they arrived together. Rajni had a bit of a slump in 89-90. Curiously this too was followed by a Mani blockbuster.

Rajinikanth had a bad phase post Guru Sishyan. He made Dharmathin Thalaivan that flopped, and then it was that disaster called Blood Stone (how many of you remember that? 🙂 )

Kodi Parakuthu with Bharathiraja also flopped big time.Then a series of hits and misses with Rajathi Raja, Siva (oh that was KB at his worst), Raja Chinna Roja, Mappillai, Panakkaran and then another couple of duds in Athisaya Piravi and Nattukkoru Nallavan.

Thalapathi revived a bit of his star status but not by much, But Mannan, Annamalai, Yejaman, Veera and Baasha catapulted him into stratospheric heights.

“Rather, I have found her very lacking in warmth when talking about other female singers (in interviews not conducted by Bharatan, I may add). ”

That’s one of her lesser transgressions. She use to block the career of anyone she deemed as potential competition. Vani Jayaram has some story to tell.

Given the background she came from (stark poverty) I can understand, though not condone, that behavior. In my previous employment someone told me that how certain managers never hire any one who, ITO, one day may become a threat to them.

Laxmi Pyare use to boast about themselves that during their initial years after successful Parasmani, SJ use to stop recording and pack off the moment they see LP in the recording studio. Decades later, Nadeem Shravan returned the favor to LP, only roles reversed.

Rajinikanth interview was awesome. He is so down to earth and simple, unlike Kamal. Kamal is all about Kamal both on and off screen. I don’t see any difference. He talks exactly the same way in movies, politics or Big boss. Same crap over and over again. Dravidam, anti-hindi, communism, socialism blah.. blah.. blah. He is an overrated actor. It’s never about the role, it’s about how long he wears makeup, playing short man, tall man, playing a white american, with his stupid accent,punjabi sardar etc. It’s all about “Kamal” rather than the role he is playing. preaching his ideology all the time.

unlike kamal Rajini does not claim to be the so-called intellectual person. On the other hand, kamal the so-called intellectual person, cannot speak one coherent sentence. And I am not sure if anybody understands what he is saying. Aamir khan is far better than Kamal who can give a wonderful finished product to the audience, Kamal’s mind is cluttered, with a lot of info, and he just vomits all the info on the screen, which results in movies like uttama villain, vishwaroopam 1&2 etc.

Rajinikanth on the other hand, atleast sticks to what he knows best. And he has achieved the kind of popularity that nobody can even imagine. Vijay, Ajit or surya none of them have the same appeal as Rajini does throughout the country

Ego is chastised here probably because the society hasn’t accepted individualism. Adhering to Social values is seen more important than individual’s needs. So anything that would make an individual standout is probably not appreciated.

This could also be a residual of some tribal culture. In certain tribes, the skills of their Hunters is played down both by the hunters themselves as well as the group. Hunting, as much as it is skilled it is also by chance. Playing down their skill is in a way acknowledging the role of chance. Also, the pride in hunting skill, which is a sign of individuality, could result in inequality within the group. Which then could result in less sharing and puts the group’s survivability at risk.

As much as there is a need for society to understand the human side of performers, there is also a need for the performers to understand that there is lot more at play in their success apart from their skills alone. Kamal and Ilaiyaraja’s skills would have meant nothing at a wrong place and at a wrong time. A war ridden country could have never appreciated their talent.

When we were conceived to be born, there was a one third chance to be of a different gender than what we are now. By chance, if only the gender has changed and even if everything else is constant, the world would be different both for us as well as for the rest. It may not have been possible for a female Hitler to have done so much damage. A female Kamal, with exactly the same skills, could not have achieved what the male Kamal has accomplished because of gender challenges. When one realises this, the ego starts deflating on its own. Would that affect their performance? May be not. Their performance may become a purer expression of their nature.

When a spider makes a beautiful web, the beauty comes out of the spider’s nature, you know, it’s instinctive beauty. And how much of the beauty of our own lives is the beauty of being alive, and how much of it is conscious intention? That’s a big question. – Joseph Campbell